Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
John Drake

3 Aug: SL: Catalans Dragons v Warrington Wolves (Merged Threads)

Who will win?  

21 members have voted

This poll is closed to new votes
  1. 1. Who will win?

    • Catalans Dragons
      14
    • Warrington Wolves
      7

  • Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.
  • Poll closed on 03/08/19 at 16:00

Recommended Posts

21 minutes ago, Exiled Wiganer said:

I didn’t use the word “thuggery”. I am astonished that 5 Catalan players have been suspended and only 1 Wire. I don’t recall even Wire fans at the time arguing that they were that much more sinned against than sinners. 

Maybe go and have a read again mate, some of the social media stuff in particular was embarrassing. 

I have been very critical of my team (well both teams), but the main criticism was around the childish behaviour and bringing the game into disrepute as a group rather than individual cases of thuggery (that word wasn't aimed at you btw). It doesn't surprise me in the slightest that Wire got few bans.

But let's look at what Catalans got.

They actually picked up 4 bans versus 1 for Wire. 2 of them were from the red cards, which are hard to argue, and the other 2 bans were from incidents earlier in the game.  Only 1 player was actually punished for the final brawl, and that is simply because nobody really did much apart from Tomkins who was found guilty of violent punching. 

The 5th (potential) ban for Catalans is for the Kenny Edwards incident, again, something Wire players didn't do.

I have acknowledged that I would have been comfortable had Hill received a ban for being a bit of a tool (not sure where that sits on the scale) but ultimately the serious incidents were carried out by Catalans players.

I genuinely think that the RFL have bottled it not charging the clubs overall, as it seems the next inquiry is only around the off-field stuff. Because in a game where there have been 8 charges handed out and 4 cautions, there should be a wider punishment to show that the game won't stand for this. 

Expecting 5 punishments each is a bit silly, as all 34 players acted differently, and this isn't about evening things up. 

Catalans have a problem at the moment that has been festering for a good few years now. The answer to the question "why is Catalans discipline so poor?" is only ever answered with claims about the Refs and the RFL. I think they need to look closer to home. I have no issue with them playing rough, as a team you develop your own style and behaviours, my team are certainly capable of mixing it up at the moment, but I don't believe in whining about it when you get hauled in for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No wonder Catalan think the refs and the RFL are against them , how the he'll did Mamo and Hill not get a ban ??????

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Tiger Wolf said:

Agree with Oliver and Padge.  Comes down to cost and logistics for my family group.  We made a few trips staying in Perpignan or coastal resorts, this got too expensive so decided to stay in LDM. Cheaper flights to Gerona,  more accomodation options, food etc, you could chill round the pool or beach.  Plus less than a couple of hours drive to Perpignan.

The last time we did it, the word was getting around and became more of a Brits on the Pi** weekend unfortunately.

I don't think we need to be too snobby about how people choose to attend this weekend, as long as they behave. These kind of trips have always been about the beer.

And we should remember that the vast vast majority of the thousands of RL fans that travel to watch their teams play Catalans each year do so with no issues. 

Warrington have always had a good rep with Catalans, and it has always been a pee up, Barcelona 10 years ago certainly was, but with no trouble. In the main these games will pass off without incident, and rather than rampant hooliganism it is fair to say that these things occur on the back of a small flashpoint which then blows up. I've made the point before, teams like Warrington have plenty of rough-asses that watch them, there are many pubs in town that I wouldn't go in for a beer.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The judgement on Mamo:

Player attempts to restrain opponent out of melee. Official witnesses player placing head on the head of opponent. Footage does not demonstrate opponent drawing head back to strike. Sin Bin Sufficient.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Dave T said:

I must admit, I wouldn't have complained had Hill been banned for ignoring the ref, but I'm not sure that has ever been done before and the circumstances were a bit crazy. 

I find that just 1 ban for McIlorum was absurd. First he has previous, and on top of that his foul started it all off with virtually zero seconds on the clock and there just having being a bad tempered fracas and the ref having just cautioned everyone to cool down. Appalling decision. His action was premeditated while everything else, bad as it was, was instinctive.

Add to that, one player who deserved a punishment during the game, Philbin for at least 2 high shots, never got a card of any sort any time. So for me not only the clubs and the players, the disciplinary have also brought the game into disrepute.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Rupert Prince said:

I find that just 1 ban for McIlorum was absurd. First he has previous, and on top of that his foul started it all off with virtually zero seconds on the clock and there just having being a bad tempered fracas and the ref having just cautioned everyone to cool down. Appalling decision. His action was premeditated while everything else, bad as it was, was instinctive.

Add to that, one player who deserved a punishment during the game, Philbin for at least 2 high shots, never got a card of any sort any time. So for me not only the clubs and the players, the disciplinary have also brought the game into disrepute.

I agree on your first paragraph. 

I must admit I can't recall the 2 high shots in particular that you refer to, but again, there being 2 means nothing. If the tackle isn't bad enough for a card, it isn't bad enough (not saying they weren't by the way, I genuinely can't recall them).

EDIT: just watched them, and I'm not sure of the fuss. They are just bog-standard high tackles that we see during a normal RL game. The 2nd one appeared to bounce off the shoulder, I thought the first was more dangerous as looked like direct contact with the neck area. 

But we see loads of high tackles which are not a card at all.

Edited by Dave T

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dave, as I pointed out earlier in the thread Wire have had a great rapport with Catalan stemming back to support in the CC semi at HJ, magic weekends plus at Wembley last year. You normally wouldnt get that level of bond between 2 super league clubs.  Yes Barcelona in 09 about 20k Catalan fans and maybe 1k Wire and no trouble.

Warrington do have a minority of fanbase that will look out for trouble or instigate, although not unique to Wire.  I wasnt at the game on Saturday but definately out of character from previous event free trips.  Although alcohol is a key contributor if anything flares up.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Dave T said:

The judgement on Mamo:

Player attempts to restrain opponent out of melee. Official witnesses player placing head on the head of opponent. Footage does not demonstrate opponent drawing head back to strike. Sin Bin Sufficient.

Give over with your facts. It's more to do with Leeds than what happened on't pitch mate. 


@ohcallicalli

You can't beat an owl!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Les Tonks Sidestep said:

A player isn't allowed to criticise the ref, whether he's the team captain or not. All he can ask is for a clarification of a decision.

Well you must not be watching the same matches I do, players disagree with many judgment calls and tell the ref so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, RLDave said:

Give over with your facts. It's more to do with Leeds than what happened on't pitch mate. 

Correct. People don’t want to hear about facts, they are only interested in things they deem as personal injustice, prejudice and conspiracy theories 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, RLDave said:

Give over with your facts. It's more to do with Leeds than what happened on't pitch mate. 

 

2 minutes ago, DoubleD said:

Correct. People don’t want to hear about facts, they are only interested in things they deem as personal injustice, prejudice and conspiracy theories 

Mamo seems a bit angry to me, and not particularly likeable on the pitch, but I am surprised to read that he could have had 3 red cards the other day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, my missus said:

5 catalan players banned! could be something to do with them playing leeds friday.

Absolutely pathetic comment. They were banned because they were s********s.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I agree on your first paragraph. 

I must admit I can't recall the 2 high shots in particular that you refer to, but again, there being 2 means nothing. If the tackle isn't bad enough for a card, it isn't bad enough (not saying they weren't by the way, I genuinely can't recall them).

EDIT: just watched them, and I'm not sure of the fuss. They are just bog-standard high tackles that we see during a normal RL game. The 2nd one appeared to bounce off the shoulder, I thought the first was more dangerous as looked like direct contact with the neck area. 

But we see loads of high tackles which are not a card at all.

Fair points. But I think clear fouls were barely punished and successive instances like this build up to where we ended up. We keep hearing about concussion protocols and a ref gives a warning!  Broadly however I agree that the blame for the fracas was not the fault of the ref. However I think he and the disciplinary can be criticised.

The game was a good game generally... very similar to the uncompromising Wigan v Hull game a few days earlier, but no trouble.  The players in the Cats game were really not interested in paying attention.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dave T said:

I agree on your first paragraph. 

I must admit I can't recall the 2 high shots in particular that you refer to, but again, there being 2 means nothing. If the tackle isn't bad enough for a card, it isn't bad enough (not saying they weren't by the way, I genuinely can't recall them).

EDIT: just watched them, and I'm not sure of the fuss. They are just bog-standard high tackles that we see during a normal RL game. The 2nd one appeared to bounce off the shoulder, I thought the first was more dangerous as looked like direct contact with the neck area. 

But we see loads of high tackles which are not a card at all.

you may be right but the issue for me was that the player (Philbin) two high shots followed two high shots from another player.   So for me it was becoming a pattern and whilst may not be intentional a sin bin should have been the least...  At some point the ref did speak to Warrington captain about the number of high shots... at that point he said it was five and that they needed to sort it. Of course the damage is done by then... damage as to wounding up opposition or damage as in impact for future head injuries...

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Suggest people have look at the alleged head shots and then they have a think about what caused the brawl. Thirty seconds left, score 30-10 to Catalans and McIlorum targets Akiola with a pre-meditated straight arm. Had this not happened, the trouble on the pitch would not have happened.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Rupert Prince said:

Fair points. But I think clear fouls were barely punished and successive instances like this build up to where we ended up. We keep hearing about concussion protocols and a ref gives a warning!  Broadly however I agree that the blame for the fracas was not the fault of the ref. However I think he and the disciplinary can be criticised.

The game was a good game generally... very similar to the uncompromising Wigan v Hull game a few days earlier, but no trouble.  The players in the Cats game were really not interested in paying attention.  

I think the ref was too lenient on verbals tbh. Even McIlorum when binned refused to leave the field with an argument. I don't mind Child tbh (I don't have an issue with any ref) but maybe one criticism is he stays perhaps too calm verbally and doesn't assert his authority. Somebody made the point that Thaler would have been firmer vocally, as would Ganson in his day. I would welcome that and a tougher stance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, redjonn said:

you may be right but the issue for me was that the player (Philbin) two high shots followed two high shots from another player.   So for me it was becoming a pattern and whilst may not be intentional a sin bin should have been the least...  At some point the ref did speak to Warrington captain about the number of high shots... at that point he said it was five and that they needed to sort it. Of course the damage is done by then... damage as to wounding up opposition or damage as in impact for future head injuries...

I wouldn't disagree with that. Persistent fouls can absolutely be punished with yellows, and it may have been an effective way to make a stand. 

I don't agree any were worthy of red.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, ELBOWSEYE said:

For what should he be banned other than not being likeable. 

Chris Hill used to be one of my favourite players.

Then he was made captain and I heard him in interviews and (more critically) speaking with the referee and things changed dramatically. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Dunbar said:

Chris Hill used to be one of my favourite players.

Then he was made captain and I heard him in interviews and (more critically) speaking with the referee and things changed dramatically. 

It is a bit embarrassing when you compare to how Adrian Morley and Lee Briers developed as captains as they got older.

Hill always seems frustrated and angry with whoever is in front of him, and tbh I genuinely believe that was his issue on Saturday at the end. He was angry with the fans, the ref, Edward's, the fact the game wasnt abandoned. He was embarrassing.

I am disappointed we havent seen any kind of apology yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Chrispmartha said:

Tomkins punching Mamo is on the TV footage

But it doesn't show the full melee between the two .If you have access to uninterrupted footage of the two please post a link .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Essai Machine said:

But it doesn't show the full melee between the two .If you have access to uninterrupted footage of the two please post a link .

So what have you seen that we havent? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Dave T said:

So what have you seen that we havent? 

I haven't seen the full contact between the two , and neither has anyone else on this forum . Seeing a few seconds of Tomkins striking Mamo doesn't prove that Mamo is innocent of any serious wrongdoing , it just means their wasn't any available footage of it .

As I said before , if you have full , unedited footage of their coming together please post a link .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 this commission is a shame of the super league

for a fight you are 2 inevivably

mc illorum 1 hight takle 1 match patton and philbin 6  high takle 0 match

tomkins punch 3 match hill punch on a  ground player 0 match

mamo 1 headbutt on tomkins 2 yellow cards 0 match (is the referee adjoint who tell this at the psychopath child

akauala shoulder charg on mll illorum and maria 0 match

this commission are sons of #####

their role is save leeds and that warrington can play the final cup quiet only

the sanctions of the catalans are correct but for warrington no

is impossible that on a général fight 1 club have 2 red cards and 5 suspended and the other 1 yellow card and 1 suspended

2 child

child is a psychopath and is the bad referee of sl

1 yellow card to hill for punch on a ground player no the reglementation is red card

the high tacle 10 for the wolfs patton and philbin 6 no yellow cards !!!!!!!!

price go out philbin after a high tacle  for evoid the yellow card child call the player ......for a caveat 

if child have make the job correct no problem

3 incident on the tribune

the fans of warrington are people fantastics and sympatics

but i see 20 assholes drunk who are not fans

these assholes go to lloret del mar for drink and arrive to the stade ramshakle and

these assholes are on the tribune with tickets of others supporters

i think that for the protection of all spectators the club of dragons must prohibit the entrance 

you are drunk go away 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Dave T said:

It is a bit embarrassing when you compare to how Adrian Morley and Lee Briers developed as captains as they got older.

Hill always seems frustrated and angry with whoever is in front of him, and tbh I genuinely believe that was his issue on Saturday at the end. He was angry with the fans, the ref, Edward's, the fact the game wasnt abandoned. He was embarrassing.

I am disappointed we havent seen any kind of apology yet.

Briers had a rapport with refs and could get away with certain things, yet Moz had a more formal approach and appeared to have respect.

On the current playing staff I think Ratch may do a decent job, although Hughes is vice so may also work.

I am not dismissing Hill as a player, still one of the better props.  Just the captaincy responsibilities appear lacking discipline.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can understand the delight of Wire fans and their enthusiasm for defending the disciplinary decisions. A 1 match ban for a winger after an ill tempered game ending in a brawl between both teams that in turn inspired horrendous off field violence is about as good as it gets.

I just don’t understand why the Panel didn’t look at the 5 - 1 result and conclude that it gives a rather imbalanced  (to neutral eyes) apportionment of blame. I really fear for the outcome of the investigation into the off field incidents similarly apportioning blame entirely to the Catalans. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...